This week's reading was Chapter 4 of Rodger Bybee's book The Teaching of Science: 21st Century Perspectives.  This chapter focused specifically on the 'teaching of science as inquiry', and delves into some of the history and current research around inquiry in the classroom.  I was quite surprised that educators have been making inquiry a priority since the 1800's, yet still it is still something that is on the back-burner for many modern science teachers.  I really connected with some of the statements in the chapter, especially those of John Dewey, where he discusses inquiry as more of a habit of the scientific mind, rather than a specific way of teaching.  Though he published most of his theories in the early 1900's he was quite ahead of his time, in realizing that many individuals look at science as a body of facts of laws that are undeniably correct, rather than as a method of questioning and gathering evidence.  I have seen this in the science classroom- students want to know what is the 'truth' or 'right answer' and be done with a topic, there is little room in their minds for questioning existing paradigms or challenging scientific ideas that don't stack up with what they believe.  Indeed, many of the prescribed BC science textbooks portray science as a collection of facts or a body of knowledge for students to learn.  Unfortunately, the impression this gives is often one where studying science is nothing more than memorizing facts and mastering theories.

This in my mind is truly a failure of the education system.  We as teachers get too wrapped up in the required content, or the 'scientific method', which many see as a set of rigid steps that a scientist flows through to achieve a conclusion, when in fact there is no such definitive protocol.  I personally believe that the scientific method is simply manipulating a question or idea, working it into new shapes and formats, integrating it into our world, and playing with it in unknown ways.  The scientific method IS inquiry, and it should involve students taking control of  their own learning, where they go through the cyclical inquiring process and increase their understanding. As they learn to think through their own designs and developments, they gain a sense of self-responsibility that can extend outside of the subject area of science. 

I also enjoyed the middle portion of the chapter, because it clarifies for the educator what inquiry in science actually looks like through a set of 'guidelines'.  These chiefly revolve around engaging in questioning and developing evidence through such questioning.  I think this is an area where students can benefit from some 'hands-on' direction from the teacher, as left to their own devices they may have trouble giving evidence the priority it deserves and formulating their explanations based on evidence alone.  The 5th essential inquiry feature is of particular importance in my opinion because through communicating and justifying findings, it gives the budding scientist opportunity to fully form their understanding.  I was further encouraged that these 5 tenets share similar themes to what I have written previously for myself about 'good science teaching'.  My personal view is that it should involve asking questions, describing events & constructing explanations, and these explanations should be tested against current science knowledge and shared.  There is often a lack of openness to alternative thinking and sometimes assumptions get the better of the budding scientist, so fostering  a critical and logical mindframe is very important.

Finally, the later section of the reading deals with research on the use of and effectiveness of inquiry.  I have read some literature on 'open inquiry', where students formulate their own problems to solve as well as the procedure (basically doing actual science), and while I think this may be an effective technique that could be progressively implemented, I am worried that it could result in a lack of directness and a reduction in performance.  So I was encouraged to read the results of the 2008 Seidel et al., study that suggested the ideal form of scientific education to be at least 4 hours of hands on science per week, experienced through multiple curricular outcomes, and in the form of guided inquiry.  I feel that open inquiry has its place, but it may be more appropriate for science clubs, science fairs and extension projects after the core scientific goals are met.  

So all in all a very though-provoking read this week.  I am encouraged to delve more of Rodger Bybee's work and I have found a very educational website on the topic of scientific inquiry called Just Science Now, which contains a large volume of information on the different types of inquiry, and appropriate lessons for facilitating that type in the classroom.